61 réponses à ce sujet

[DanteYoda]

Here are memes as payback for the other threads......

 

Here is a Hater..

 

Here is a Bioware Fan..

 

Here are gamers who disliked Dragon Age Inquisition

[b10d1v]

After playing BFHardline and the many glitches and bugs it has, I don't think BW is going to figure out the frostbite engine
Frostbite was made for BF and they haven't figured it out yet
If BW wants to keep using frostbite engine they will be experimenting for a while, graphics are only one part of a game and not the most important imo but a lot of people like eye candy over story(don't know why?)
Unfortunately that's how DAI turned out

Put simply it's an additional set of boundary conditions introduced by the frostbite engine for surface texture rendering, but you are quite right there is a new way of thinking -a learning curve that needs to be traveled.

[b10d1v]

Danteyoda that really captures the first days if DAI - "out of the box", so to speak, when it would not start or it crashed sporadically resetting power.   I paid for this????   I have never stripped a game just to find out why it didn't work, that is until then.  Well, I wanted to understand how surface texturing was being done also.  For the most part it was much like ME3 -then it hit me like a ton of bricks and I knew exactly why video hard crash issues were occurring and it was definitely a QA issue they had not cleaned the Beta code of its test drivers.  The boundary condition instabilities can easily be followed in most cases and part of the problem is you should not see background effects.  The boundary layers virtual space required is problemattic, there should not be any interaction with them or things bounce or get pushed. This is why I scream BS when someone defends DAI and why I ask folks to wait DAI is not mod ready because it remains incomplete.

 

I'm friendly enough with the folks at Bioware, just very disappointed in management, performance and process failures that led to so much frustration.

[duckley]

Thank-you

[Megakoresh]

Frostbite - or rather, it's implementation in this game - is a part of the problem though.  Hitboxes (they're apparently all human sized) and how they glitch up melee attacks are a contributor to the general wonkiness of combat. The shaders/lighting are plain weird in many places, giving very shiny armor a really odd surface effect and make dracolisk teeth look like MS paint jobs. 

 

Some NPCs - the ones that never move at all and don't budge if you run into them - may actually not be movable objects or "actors" at all, but people-shaped furniture instead.

 

That said, I don't disagree that the filler content is the main problem. That and the "tell, don't show" approach that is taken a bit too often for my liking.

By "tell, don't show" you mean "write, don't tell"? As in they just spam us with text all the time, instead of, like in Origins, balancing it between dialogue with interesting characters, idle chatter, showing it through locations and occasionally a well-placed log.

 

Anyway, the wonkiness of combat is a control scheme issue. And that in turn is an issue of design. I write about it in detail here. Engines are responsible for things like graphics, stability, optimization, latency, responsiveness of UI and of course how easy it is to implement all of the above - which we can't know, since we aren't BioWare. As far as those things are concerned, the game seems to me rather well-made. It has never crashed, it's very resilient to alt-tabbing or even cheating (I use the teleporter a lot, can't stand the stupid strolling around the map with nothing but idle trash mobs in between fetch quest checkpoints), it is well-optimized, the UI is responsive. The only issue I would attribute to the engine are the ridiculously long loading times.

 

Really, I mostly view switching to Frostbite as a positive thing. It's a new engine, and it's owned by EA, which means they get more freedom (hopefully, if EA/Dice are doing it right) to do what they want with the code, it's more extensible and supports modern technology. The problems with Inquisition, from my perspective, don't have anything to do with Frostbite, I'd rather they kept using it, but just design a better game from now on.

[Gileadan]

Yes, "write, don't tell" is what I mean. I just stuck to what I thought was a more common expression.

 

I've read the post you made, and I agree that the switch to Frostbite was generally a good thing. I suspect that the quality of its implementation into the game is lacking in some points. About the human sized hitboxes - that can be tested rather easily in game. Find a great bear in the Emerald Graves and try to hit it from the front, while it's on all four, with a melee attack that does not cause AoE damage (like Pommel Strike). It's practically impossible to do, because the bear's single hitbox is human sized and located in the middle of its model, and due to its size and shape, the model will block you from reaching the hitbox. Pommel Strike is an extreme example, but even if you have assassin Cole swiping at the great bear from the front, you'll notice that he begins to "slide" past the head and to the bear's flank... because that's the shortest way to the center hitbox. Same reason why dragons have a hitbox in every leg, and why dragonlings have three of them - every hit point bar is attached to its own hitbox, and those creatures need multiple hitboxes so they can be hit by melee characters. This is the only explanation I could come up with to explain the things I found odd in melee combat, and none of the things I tried out contradicted this theory so far. Now I know that Frostbite can have differently sized hitboxes, cause otherwise tanks and helicopters would be very hard to hit in BF4. They're just weird in DA:I.

[Kynare]

There's nothing wrong with enjoying a game.

 

Power to ya'.

[Shevy]

I have a dream that one day haters are free to post in this thread.

[Megakoresh]

Yes, "write, don't tell" is what I mean. I just stuck to what I thought was a more common expression.

 

I've read the post you made, and I agree that the switch to Frostbite was generally a good thing. I suspect that the quality of its implementation into the game is lacking in some points. About the human sized hitboxes - that can be tested rather easily in game. Find a great bear in the Emerald Graves and try to hit it from the front, while it's on all four, with a melee attack that does not cause AoE damage (like Pommel Strike). It's practically impossible to do, because the bear's single hitbox is human sized and located in the middle of its model, and due to its size and shape, the model will block you from reaching the hitbox. Pommel Strike is an extreme example, but even if you have assassin Cole swiping at the great bear from the front, you'll notice that he begins to "slide" past the head and to the bear's flank... because that's the shortest way to the center hitbox. Same reason why dragons have a hitbox in every leg, and why dragonlings have three of them - every hit point bar is attached to its own hitbox, and those creatures need multiple hitboxes so they can be hit by melee characters. This is the only explanation I could come up with to explain the things I found odd in melee combat, and none of the things I tried out contradicted this theory so far. Now I know that Frostbite can have differently sized hitboxes, cause otherwise tanks and helicopters would be very hard to hit in BF4. They're just weird in DA:I.

I... have nothing to say to this: it's a very good example! I wonder if it's patchable... Although I doubt they would go as far as to redo the hitboxes, when they don't even have a control scheme that would take advantage of such a fix. Still, it's a point well made and should be considered for the future.

[In Exile]

By "tell, don't show" you mean "write, don't tell"? As in they just spam us with text all the time, instead of, like in Origins, balancing it between dialogue with interesting characters, idle chatter, showing it through locations and occasionally a well-placed log.

Anyway, the wonkiness of combat is a control scheme issue. And that in turn is an issue of design. I write about it in detail here. Engines are responsible for things like graphics, stability, optimization, latency, responsiveness of UI and of course how easy it is to implement all of the above - which we can't know, since we aren't BioWare. As far as those things are concerned, the game seems to me rather well-made. It has never crashed, it's very resilient to alt-tabbing or even cheating (I use the teleporter a lot, can't stand the stupid strolling around the map with nothing but idle trash mobs in between fetch quest checkpoints), it is well-optimized, the UI is responsive. The only issue I would attribute to the engine are the ridiculously long loading times.

Really, I mostly view switching to Frostbite as a positive thing. It's a new engine, and it's owned by EA, which means they get more freedom (hopefully, if EA/Dice are doing it right) to do what they want with the code, it's more extensible and supports modern technology. The problems with Inquisition, from my perspective, don't have anything to do with Frostbite, I'd rather they kept using it, but just design a better game from now on.

I'm not sure DAO is a better example. That game relied a lot on infodumps in conversations, especially through your companions. That's better than codixes but it's not really good.

If we want to look at a game that develops the content through a creative means of conversation, investigation and codixes then IMO the example is Alpha Protocol.

[sleasye74]

Holy sh*t I thought I was the only person to play alpha protocol(like 2 or 3 years ago) lol
That Russian chick is something else